↓ Skip to main content

Congenital macrothrombocytopenia-linked mutations in the actin-binding domain of α-actinin-1 enhance F-actin association

Overview of attention for article published in Febs Letters, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Congenital macrothrombocytopenia-linked mutations in the actin-binding domain of α-actinin-1 enhance F-actin association
Published in
Febs Letters, March 2016
DOI 10.1002/1873-3468.12101
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anita C. H. Murphy, Andrew J. Lindsay, Mary W. McCaffrey, Kristina Djinović-Carugo, Paul W. Young

Abstract

Mutations in the actin cross-linking protein actinin-1 were recently linked to dominantly inherited congenital macrothrombocytopenia. Here we report that several disease-associated mutations that are located within the actinin-1 actin-binding domain cause increased binding of actinin-1 to actin filaments and enhance filament bundling in vitro. These actinin-1 mutants are also more stably associated with the cytoskeleton in cultured cells, as assessed by biochemical fractionation and fluorescence recovery after photobleaching experiments. For two mutations the disruption of contacts between the calponin homology domains within the actinin actin-binding domain may explain increased filament binding - providing mechanistic and structural insights into the basis of actinin-1 dysfunction in congenital macrothrombocytopenia. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 19%
Student > Master 4 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Other 2 10%
Student > Postgraduate 2 10%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 4 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 43%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 24%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 5%
Unknown 5 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 March 2016.
All research outputs
#9,200,480
of 14,619,289 outputs
Outputs from Febs Letters
#10,712
of 12,119 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#143,890
of 265,661 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Febs Letters
#25
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,619,289 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,119 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 265,661 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.